Court Casts Wider Deportation Net, DHS Claims Ruling Hurts Illegals

President Joe Biden’s immigration policy, which claims to prioritize the deportation of illegal immigrants based on whether they pose a threat to public safety, has been upended by a court ruling that says removing people who are in the country illegally applies across the board.

The decision by a federal judge in Texas took effect Friday after a federal appeals court failed to issue a decision to block it.

Biden’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said it now has no discretion to decide how to set its deportation priorities.

“While the department strongly disagrees with the Southern District of Texas’ court decision to vacate the guidelines, D.H.S. will abide by the court’s order as it continues to appeal it,” the department said in a statement.

The New York Times reported on the development as if some illegal immigration should not be subject to federal immigration law:

[DHS said] Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents would make enforcement decisions on a case-by-case basis “in a professional and responsible manner, informed by their experience as law enforcement officials and in a way that best protects against the greatest threats to the homeland.”

The court order leaves the government in an unusual situation. Recent administrations have set at least some priorities establishing which undocumented immigrants should be targeted for removal, in most cases trying to identify people who have committed crimes or who pose some other threat before moving on to others. The Trump administration significantly broadened the range of immigrants identified for deportation, but, even then, there was some guidance to target criminals, legal experts said.

The Times slammed the Donald Trump administration for enforcing federal immigration law in all cases and claimed Biden is taking a more “measured approach to enforcement even without a prioritization policy.”

Last year, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas wrote a policy memo to immigration agents to assess deportation based on public safety threat, but also according to how long they have been in the country illegally, if they are old, and if they have U.S.-born children.

The Times claimed that leaves as many as 11 million illegal aliens in the country that are threatened with deportation.

“The problem with moving away from priorities is, there is no standardization, no rhyme or reason,” Karen Tumlin, founder of Justice Action Center, said in the Times report.

In the lower case decision Judge Drew B. Tipton, who was appointed by Trump, said the DHS memo on priorities was “arbitrary and capricious” and that federal law requires a series of procedures before such a policy change can be enacted, including a period that allows for public comments.

Tipton also said the policy “ties the hands” of agents to do their job.

Supporters of the ruling said immigration courts, not agents, should be making deportation decisions.

“Congress doesn’t allow immigration officers, nor can it expect them, to assess whether these are good fathers, coach Little League or are ushers in their local church,” Andrew Arthur, a resident fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, said in the Times report.